Ken Smith wrote:
At the point where it fails, the output goes to zero, I assume. If so,
wouldn't that be the impedance as I've been defining it.

Is an amp that fails at one minute with 100w FM
better matched than an amp that fails at two minutes
with 100w CW?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

I read in sci.electronics.design that Cecil Moore
wrote (in ) about '1/4 vs 1/2 wavelength
antenna', on Sat, 26 Feb 2005:
Is an amp that fails at one minute with 100w FM
better matched than an amp that fails at two minutes
with 100w CW?

If the FM is what passes for music these days, it's MUCH better IMHO.
(;-)
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

In article ,
John Woodgate wrote:
[...]
If the FM is what passes for music these days, it's MUCH better IMHO.

There is very little that is sent in the form of radio waves that is worth
the electrical power to send it. The really sad thing is that much of
what is send via FM is really "voice grade" material. When FM was new,
the material for FM was specially produced to take advantage of the wide
bandwidth and large dynamic range.

--
--
forging knowledge

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 17:12:46 +0000, Ken Smith wrote:

In article ,
John Woodgate wrote:
[...]
If the FM is what passes for music these days, it's MUCH better IMHO.

There is very little that is sent in the form of radio waves that is worth
the electrical power to send it.


Hmm, many advertisers would disagree. Since they have real money at stake
and you don't...

The really sad thing is that much of
what is send via FM is really "voice grade" material. When FM was new,
the material for FM was specially produced to take advantage of the wide
bandwidth and large dynamic range.

Bandwidth, perhaps. Wide dynamic range? The FCC rules seem to
suggest otherwise.

--
Keith

In article ,
keith wrote:
On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 17:12:46 +0000, Ken Smith wrote:

In article ,
John Woodgate wrote:
[...]
If the FM is what passes for music these days, it's MUCH better IMHO.

There is very little that is sent in the form of radio waves that is worth
the electrical power to send it.


Hmm, many advertisers would disagree. Since they have real money at stake
and you don't...

They say that 1/2 of all advertising money is just wasted. The problem is
no-one can say which half.

Besides the advertisers don't care about the value of what is sent. They
only care about the wallet of those who are listening.



The really sad thing is that much of
what is send via FM is really "voice grade" material. When FM was new,
the material for FM was specially produced to take advantage of the wide
bandwidth and large dynamic range.

Bandwidth, perhaps. Wide dynamic range? The FCC rules seem to
suggest otherwise.

How do you arrive at that? FCC rules don't specify the nature of the
music programming, really. If the "music" always has the modulation index
at least 30% with rap, the dynamic range actually needed is much less than
for something from BareNakedLadys

--
--
forging knowledge

In article , Cecil Moore wrote:
Ken Smith wrote:
At the point where it fails, the output goes to zero, I assume. If so,
wouldn't that be the impedance as I've been defining it.

Is an amp that fails at one minute with 100w FM
better matched than an amp that fails at two minutes
with 100w CW?

No, you've got the concept backwards. Obviously the worst matched is the
1 o=minute case, next would be the 2 minute case and so on up to one which
runs for about its MTBF at the connected load. This last case would
likely be the one the designer was targeting.

--
--
forging knowledge

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 17:08:23 +0000 (UTC),
(Ken Smith) wrote:

In article , Cecil Moore wrote:
Ken Smith wrote:
At the point where it fails, the output goes to zero, I assume. If so,
wouldn't that be the impedance as I've been defining it.

Is an amp that fails at one minute with 100w FM
better matched than an amp that fails at two minutes
with 100w CW?

No, you've got the concept backwards. Obviously the worst matched is the
1 o=minute case, next would be the 2 minute case and so on up to one which
runs for about its MTBF at the connected load. This last case would
likely be the one the designer was targeting.

--

It's been thirty years since I "hammed". I was only interested in the
electronics, not the talking, so I dropped out after I got a homemade
solid-state 2-meter rig running.

But I vaguely recall a 5/8 wavelength antenna that had a good
low-angle pattern.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

In article ,
Jim Thompson wrote:
[....]

But I vaguely recall a 5/8 wavelength antenna that had a good
low-angle pattern.

Unfortunately, the OP (is he still here?) was stuck with a box to short to
even fit a 1/4 wave whip. I also think that this box could not be assumed
to be resting on the ground


If you squint at the ASCII art below, you will see more or less the
radiation pattern of a 5/8 whip over a large ground plain.
.................................
.................!...............
...........******!*****..........
..........*......!......*........
..........*......!......*........
...........****..!..****...A.....
........*******..!..*******......
.....***.........!.........***...
...*.............!.............*B
********************************

If you don't have a large enough ground plain, the notch in the side
labeled "A" starts to go away and the peak at "B" reduces.


--
--
forging knowledge

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 17:52:52 +0000 (UTC),
(Ken Smith) wrote:

In article ,
Jim Thompson wrote:
[....]

But I vaguely recall a 5/8 wavelength antenna that had a good
low-angle pattern.

Unfortunately, the OP (is he still here?) was stuck with a box to short to
even fit a 1/4 wave whip. I also think that this box could not be assumed
to be resting on the ground


If you squint at the ASCII art below, you will see more or less the
radiation pattern of a 5/8 whip over a large ground plain.
................................
................!...............
..........******!*****..........
.........*......!......*........
.........*......!......*........
..........****..!..****...A.....
.......*******..!..*******......
....***.........!.........***...
..*.............!.............*B
********************************

If you don't have a large enough ground plain, the notch in the side
labeled "A" starts to go away and the peak at "B" reduces.


--

The rain in Spain falls mainly on the plain ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

Still here, not quite sure who to believe, but enjoying the ride :-)